McCain Is Part Of The Problem For The GOP, Not Part Of The Solution
This is an interesting — as in completely wrong — take on the GOP’s woes helping John McCain take the brass ring in 2008:
“It’s still a long time until the Iowa caucuses formally kick off the 2008 race for the White House. But it’s hard not to conclude that events are lining up perfectly for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), should he decide to make another run.
A weakened President Bush and a damaged Republican Party are more likely than not to convince GOP activists around the country — including some conservatives and party regulars who ordinarily would not warm to McCain — that the Arizona Republican is the only man who can carry the party’s banner in 2008.”
Here’s the thing: other than on deficit spending, John McCain is in the wrong of almost every issue that has hurt the Party.
Illegal Immigration? John McCain favors making illegals citizens.
The Gang-of-14 compromise that may allow Democrats to start filibustering judges again in 2006? John McCain was the leader of the pack.
The Dubai Ports deal, which was, whether you think it’s good or bad, political poison? John McCain backed it.
Harriet Miers? John McCain supported her all the way.
The biggest success of Bush’s first term domestically, the tax cuts? McCain voted against them.
Campaign finance laws that helped ramp up spending on politics and gave the Democrats a financial edge in 2004? John McCain wrote the bill.
Having John McCain as a nominee in 2008 would be like asking the guy who steered the ship into an iceberg to take over as captain.
No, thank you.
Moreover, consider this:
1980: An extremely conservative Ronald Reagan wins in a landslide.
1984: Landslide #2 for the Gipper — and remember, this is before Fox, before talk radio took off, and before the blogosphere existed.
1988: George Bush, Sr. essentially passes himself off as Ronald Reagan, Jr.
1992: The American public found out Bush wasn’t as conservative as advertised. He loses w/ an assist from Perot.
1994: The public is nauseated by Clinton’s swerve to the left and an extremely conservative “Contract With America” helps the GOP take the House.
1996: Bob Dole, whom Newt Gingrich once derisively referred to as the “tax collector for the liberal welfare state”, loses to Clinton with an assist from Perot.
2000: George Bush, who runs as a “compassionate” conservative ekes a victory out over Al Gore.
2004: George Bush, whose domestic policies were revealed to be not particularly conservative, ekes a victory out over John Kerry on the strength of W’s aggressive foreign policy.
See? If you look at the history of the Republican Party since 1980, you’ll find that our greatest successes on the national level have come when we’ve unapologetically acted like conservatives and we’ve tended to falter or lose outright when we’ve moved to the middle or to the left.
Granted, Ronald Reagan was the sort of politician who comes along every 50 years or so, but given our experiences over the last two and a half decades, why wouldn’t we want a candidate in 2008 who generally seems to share his views on the issues rather than McCain, a guy who shares many of Bush’s worst faults and is even to his left on some key issues?
McCain is not the solution to the GOP’s issues, he’s part of the problem with the Party.